If you are a user of a safety-critical embedded system and you find that the designer has not followed the best implementation and safety standards in the design of the device, how much worry do you have? I know that I am very upset, and according to the recent Embedded System Security Survey by Barr Group, we all need to be worried.
Barr Group has just completed data analysis from 2,400 respondents who are currently engineers engaged in embedded device design; these are spread across the globe (46% from North America and 33% from Europe) A sample of engineers, we are very happy to learn about the design philosophy and practice of engineers, and the connection with security. However, we also saw from the results of the investigation that there is no need to solve the problem - everyone should stop and think about it.
According to the survey, 22% of the respondents indicated that the device design they are currently working on is related to personal safety - is it surprising? But when we asked what would happen if the device they designed failed, what was the worst case, more than 500 respondents said it might cause one or more deaths! Most of these respondents worked in industrial automation, medical devices, automotive and aerospace industries.
It is not surprising that the equipment manufactured by those industries is safe, but through this large-scale investigation, we want to know whether these design engineers have the safety standards and the best practices for reliability and maintainability. Methods: IEC, FDA, FAA, NHTSA, SAE, IEEE, MISRA and other professional organizations and industrial organizations have established standards for engineering design safety. We originally expected respondents to have close to 100% positive responses.
But unfortunately, this is not the case at all! -- Only 67% of respondents said their designs follow safety standards, 22% said they didn't, and 11% didn't even know if the design they were working on had safety standards. That is to say, in every three safety-critical device designs, there may be a loophole in safety, reliability or quality that has not been properly watched or reviewed. This is really worrying.
Let's move on to a bit more in-depth discussion: To meet industry security standards, it can cost a lot of cost and time, so to achieve a best implementation of a good design? For example, using coding standards, code review, and statistical analysis on software design? The response of engineers who are involved in the design of safety devices in this technical field is even more worrying. Please see the statistics below:
Software engineers working on the design of secure embedded devices are like this when writing programs...
Why are the numbers of respondents who answered “yes†above these questions not close to 100%? We published the results of the survey at the Embedded World Embedded Design Symposium held in Germany not long ago, and I have seen many listeners’ reactions are astonished and skeptical; those reactions are worried about whether our findings are true or not. Do you suspect that such statistics are likely to go wrong.
Skeptics have a lot of opinions. Some people question that our survey numbers are biased because not all of our respondents are software engineers, so we may not know the implementation methods of software development engineers; but we don't think this is a problem. Because this is based on a statistical analysis of the respondents' responses (in fact, only 6% of our respondents indicated that they are only engaged in hardware design).
Others question whether there is a regional bias in statistics, but we emphasize again that because we have access to a large number of respondents from North America, Europe and Asia, we believe that statistics are the best value for a good engineer.
Others have questioned whether those engineers are actually designing non-critical subsystems in security devices (such as satellite broadcasters in cars)? But according to our observations, today's device interconnection and security challenges, even non-critical subsystems, may affect other parts of the overall system.
The above findings motivate us all to pay attention to this situation; supervisors need to understand the importance of safety and must be branded in the design project timeline and budget table. The reality is that we all need to know that in the age of the Internet of Things (IoT), our devices are increasingly critical to the global infrastructure.
All of us must contribute time, resources, and money to improve the reliability of our products. If we can do this and continue, we can protect the lives of all people (so that all companies can not suffer greater losses).
Branch Chandelier,Rope Chandelier,Geometric Chandelier,Square Chandelier
GUANGDONG LAVIUS LIGHTING CO., LTD. , https://www.laviuslighting.com